Structured debate - Revision history

Woozle: reworked significantly; lots of stuff moved to debate mapper

2019-11-12T02:08:29Z

reworked significantly; lots of stuff moved to debate mapper

Woozle: clarifying; note about asking questions

2017-06-12T08:55:39Z

clarifying; note about asking questions

Woozle: /* Links */ notes - Sakari

2013-06-27T01:18:41Z

Links: notes - Sakari

Woozle: validating claims

2013-04-28T16:24:55Z

validating claims

Woozle: /* Features */ relationships

2013-04-14T02:21:19Z

Features: relationships

Woozle: Issuepedia link

2013-04-13T22:47:14Z

Issuepedia link

Woozle: /* Process */ case-sensitivity, part 2

2013-04-13T22:42:12Z

Process: case-sensitivity, part 2

Woozle: /* Process */ seems to be case-sensitive

2013-04-13T22:41:00Z

Process: seems to be case-sensitive

Woozle: /* Process */ new information should affect the outcome

2013-04-13T22:40:33Z

Process: new information should affect the outcome

Woozle: a bit more hierarchy

2013-04-13T22:37:15Z

a bit more hierarchy

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 '''Author's note''': Despite multiple refinements, this is still rather wordy. Feel free to ask me questions on [https://toot.cat/@woozle Mastodon], and that will help me improve this explanation.
 ==About==
-[[Structured debate]] is a process for maximizing the [[rational debate|rationality of a debate]]. It assumes that the intent of debate is to determine the most likely truth when there is disagreement and that any party may be using invalid reasoning or incorrect facts.
+[[Structured debate]] is a way of cutting through disinformation and misunderstanding around complex topics. The key observation behind it is that policy decisions often depend on chains of logic that have gotten tangled or lost, and people forget or don't notice that key premises are basically wrong.
-Structured debate provides a system for keeping track of the status of every point and counterpoint that has been raised in a debate. It allows multiple participants to make contributions simultaneously (which would not be possible in a spoken debate), permitting much more thorough fact-checking than in other forms of debate and ensuring that all positions have an opportunity to assert their objections to any given conclusion.
+The mapper keeps track of the logical structure and shows what happens to the conclusion when a premise is found to be in error.
-Ideally, the end result would be that everyone could agree on the correct (best, most likely, most reasonable) answer to any given question. In practice, of course, there will be a few people who refuse to recognize illogic (or insist that correct logic must be wrong, probably because it leads to answers they don't like); there are multiple ways of dealing with this conflict. The fact that the debate is reduced to a cascading set of simple premises and conclusions should help minimize ''unintentional'' illogic.
+So being "reasonable" ends up meaning you have to go along with a conclusion that's both factually and intuitively wrong.
-Any premise, when disputed, becomes another claim to be examined; this process can be repeated ("drilling down") until a set of claims is reached upon which no further debate seems possible ("drilling down to bedrock").
+Structured debate, and the [[debate mapper]] software, are designed to keep track of these complex relationships in order to reduce such errors from "inevitable" to "rare".
+==Pages==
-During the process of drilling down into any given claim, one eventually finds one of the following:
+* [[/rules]]: structural design / "business" logic
-* '''bad reasoning''': the conclusion is not supported by the premises given
+==Refinements==
 ===Ecosystem Features===
 * '''Linking''': In order to negate the need to replay existing debates within new contexts, any given point in a debate can be made dynamically dependent on the outcome of another debate.
@@ Line 67: / Line 36: @@
 ==Flaws==
 * [[/counterpoint spam]]: Dishonest participants may repeatedly raise spurious objections solely for the purpose of keeping the correct conclusion in a state of presumed falsehood.
-==Links==
+==Related==
 * {{issuepedia}} has an article about SD. Some of the material there should probably be moved or copied over here.
 ==Notes==
-* Note Sakari's comments [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/d9jVWJH5u1z here].
+* Note Sakari's comments <s>[https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/d9jVWJH5u1z here]</s>.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 [[category:tools]]
 ==About==
-[[Structured debate]] is a process for maximizing the [[rational debate|rationality of a debate]]. It assumes that the intent of debate is to determine the most likely truth when there is disagreement and that any party may be using invalid reasoning or incorrect facts. It relies on an ability to reliably reach consensus about whether reasoning is logical regardless of consensus on the conclusions.
+[[Structured debate]] is a process for maximizing the [[rational debate|rationality of a debate]]. It assumes that the intent of debate is to determine the most likely truth when there is disagreement and that any party may be using invalid reasoning or incorrect facts.
 Structured debate provides a system for keeping track of the status of every point and counterpoint that has been raised in a debate. It allows multiple participants to make contributions simultaneously (which would not be possible in a spoken debate), permitting much more thorough fact-checking than in other forms of debate and ensuring that all positions have an opportunity to assert their objections to any given conclusion.
-For any given conclusion, if you drill down deep enough you eventually find either:
+Ideally, the end result would be that everyone could agree on the correct (best, most likely, most reasonable) answer to any given question. In practice, of course, there will be a few people who refuse to recognize illogic (or insist that correct logic must be wrong, probably because it leads to answers they don't like); there are multiple ways of dealing with this conflict. The fact that the debate is reduced to a cascading set of simple premises and conclusions should help minimize ''unintentional'' illogic.
-* bad reasoning -- a disputed conclusion is not valid; an undisputed conclusion may be true, but not for the reasons given
+===Truth Evaluation===
-* evidence that everyone can agree on (plus valid reasoning all the way up) -- the conclusion is valid
+In order to be [[rational]]ly defensible, any '''claim''' must be based on one or more '''premises''' which are combined into a conclusion via a '''logical operation''' (either "if all of X are true, then Y must be true" or "if any of X are true, then Y must be true"). An individual can either agree with the conclusion, or can dispute either the reasoning or the premises. Faulty reasoning is pretty obvious once it's pointed out; faulty evidence is generally based on further evidence-plus-reasoning which may itself be agreeable or not.
 ===Related Pages===
 * InstaGov's [[debate mapper]] module is a software implementation of the [[structured debate]] methodology.
@@ Line 25: / Line 34: @@
 In theory, a structured debate can be held in an unstructured plaintext discussion environment such as Google+ or Facebook; rules and an example for doing this are [[/rules/plaintext|here]]. This format does require significantly more discipline from the participants, however.
 ===Process===
-* Anyone may start a debate at any time; debate starts with an assertion of fact (the "prime assertion"), preferably defended by [[/supporting argument]]s.
+* Anyone may start a debate at any time; debate starts with an assertion of fact (the "prime assertion"), preferably defended by supporting arguments.
-* Anyone may add [[/counter argument]]s or additional supporting arguments to this assertion at any time.
+* Anyone may add [[issuepedia:Argument/counter|counterarguments]] or additional supporting arguments to this assertion at any time.
 * Each supporting or countering argument is itself an assertion, and may be further supported or countered at any time.
 * Debate continues indefinitely.

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:18, 27 June 2013
Line 60:		Line 60:
	==Links==		==Links==
	* {{issuepedia}} has an article about SD. Some of the material there should probably be moved or copied over here.		* {{issuepedia}} has an article about SD. Some of the material there should probably be moved or copied over here.
		+	==Notes==
		+	* Note Sakari's comments [https://plus.google.com/u/0/102282887764745350285/posts/d9jVWJH5u1z here].

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 Structured debate provides a system for keeping track of the status of every point and counterpoint that has been raised in a debate. It allows multiple participants to make contributions simultaneously (which would not be possible in a spoken debate), permitting much more thorough fact-checking than in other forms of debate and ensuring that all positions have an opportunity to assert their objections to any given conclusion.
 ===Related Pages===
 * InstaGov's [[debate mapper]] module is a software implementation of the [[structured debate]] methodology.

@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 * '''Linking''': In order to negate the need to replay existing debates within new contexts, any given point in a debate can be made dynamically dependent on the outcome of another debate.
 * '''Categorization''': any given point within a debate may touch on one or more topics of general interest, and should be findable by anyone exploring that topic. ''A system for managing [[icms:Crowdsourced taxonomy|crowdsourced topic-tagging]] is under development.''
 ===Usability Features===
 Additional features not essential to the basic concept but which makes it more usable:
@@ Line 43: / Line 49: @@
 There may be other usability features we will want to include.
 ==Flaws==
 * [[/counterpoint spam]]: Dishonest participants may repeatedly raise spurious objections solely for the purpose of keeping the correct conclusion in a state of presumed falsehood.
 ==Links==
 * {{issuepedia}} has an article about SD. Some of the material there should probably be moved or copied over here.

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:47, 13 April 2013
Line 45:		Line 45:
	==Flaws==		==Flaws==
	* [[/counterpoint spam]]: Dishonest participants may repeatedly raise spurious objections solely for the purpose of keeping the correct conclusion in a state of presumed falsehood.		* [[/counterpoint spam]]: Dishonest participants may repeatedly raise spurious objections solely for the purpose of keeping the correct conclusion in a state of presumed falsehood.
		+	==Links==
		+	* {{issuepedia}} has an article about SD. Some of the material there should probably be moved or copied over here.

@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 * Each supporting or countering argument is itself an assertion, and may be further supported or countered at any time.
 * Debate continues indefinitely.
-** If new information is discovered which affects the debate, this information can be added immediately, with the potential to immediately change the debate's outcome (and hence the outcomes of any other debates which depend on this one, if others are linked to it; see [[#Ecosystem features]]).
+** If new information is discovered which affects the debate, this information can be added immediately, with the potential to immediately change the debate's outcome (and hence the outcomes of any other debates which depend on this one, if others are linked to it; see [[#Ecosystem Features]]).
 ** The design currently presumes that the final state of the prime assertion will eventually settle down to being true or false for long periods of time, as nobody will have any additional points to add; in practicality, decisions based on the debate's outcome will need to be made at specific times, and debates should be held in such a way that the final state will be likely to have settled down by the time any decision must be made.
 ** There should probably also be a minimum amount of time between the last state-change and the actual decision, so as to negate the effects of last-minute [[/counterpoint spam]]ming.

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 * InstaGov's [[debate mapper]] module is a software implementation of the [[structured debate]] methodology.
 * [[Structured debate]] is a tool for managing [[rational debate]].
 ===Terminology===
 # An '''[[issuepedia:argument|argument]]''' is a set of assertions that logically draw a conclusion from a set of premises.
@@ Line 26: / Line 27: @@
 Individual debate venues may wish to make changes or additions to the procedural rules in order to accommodate their specific needs and circumstances.
 ===Ecosystem Features===
 * '''Linking''': In order to negate the need to replay existing debates within new contexts, any given point in a debate can be made dynamically dependent on the outcome of another debate.